Centaur

Jump back to quoted post3 Nov 2015, 23:06 PMFiresparks

historical fact run second to balance and design.

its current speed severely limit it survivability and the unit's usefulness.

beside, the centuar was slow for a british tank, but its liberty engine was still more powerful than the maybach used on the panzer4/ostwind. If we are going into reliability, it is going to open a whole new can of worm for the tiger and panther as well.

At least give the centaur similar speed as the ostwind/p4.



the thing is slower than a tiger. It can't run away from anything except for the super slow king tiger. If it doesn't have its overpowering dps then it needs the mobility to escape.

Jump back to quoted post3 Nov 2015, 16:11 PMUGBEAR

It sucks right now, no hard feelings, save the money and get a fast cromwell or a Churchill is much safer way to go.

Jump back to quoted post3 Nov 2015, 23:38 PMferwiner

You are not right. Centaur used 340hp engine what gave it 12,1 hp/t while tiger used 690hp engine that gave it 12,8 hp/t. As a reference cromwell had 21,4 hp/t what gave it superior speed and acceleration. Centaur on the other hand was slighlty slower and more cumbersome than tiger however funny it seems to be for a crusier tank. This is due to the fact that tiger was quite fast for a ww2 heavy tank and that crusarder used really bad and outdated engine.

Jump back to quoted post4 Nov 2015, 00:26 AMNuclear Arbitor

i keep seeing people mention the mobility of the centaur but i don't understand why it's an issue. i personally find it annoying and it does make it easier to overextend the tank (which is a user issue, not a vehicle issue) but it's still faster the infantry and it's still fast enough to get around.

can someone please explain to my why the mobility is bad?

Jump back to quoted post4 Nov 2015, 00:28 AMFiresparks

centaur top speed = 4.6, acceleration = 1.5

tiger top speed = 4.7, acceleration = 1.5

It's slower than the Tiger

Jump back to quoted post4 Nov 2015, 00:35 AMNuclear Arbitor

which is kind of silly but i don't see why that's a balance issue. again, it just makes it easier to over extend the tank. there is of course also the question of why it's so slow in the first place (maybe because the damage was so high). but i don't find the unit under preforming at all from teh speed when i use it; i just make sure to keep it close to shot blockers.

Jump back to quoted post3 Nov 2015, 15:02 PMAce of Swords

Damage wise is fine, buff the speed sightly also whats it's hp compared to the ostwind?

Jump back to quoted post3 Nov 2015, 23:51 PMRollo

Well OP you and others were asking for a healthy damage nerf, most wanting it nerfed to ostwind levels despite the fact it's slow and has no blitz/smoke.

All that needed changing was the damage vs buildings

Jump back to quoted post4 Nov 2015, 00:54 AMatouba

The same HP a the ostwind,it's 640,but much more armor than the ostwind,the Centaur is 160/80,while the ostwind is 110/55.So I think it's fine the centaur is slower than the ostwind.

Jump back to quoted post4 Nov 2015, 00:48 AMFiresparks

The tiger is slow. but it's also one of the most durable tank and a powerful main gun.

the centaur by comparison have good anti-infantry capability but no where near the firepower or durability the tiger possess. This make a huge difference in their survivability as the tiger will easily scare away most enemy by its presence alone and have the toughness to survive getting shot at.

the centaur's durability is "okay" at best, but it lack the speed to ran away from most enemy.

Saying the speed is a safety to prevent over-extension is idiotic. Any smart or decent player can judge the situation and prevent himself from overextending. Only idiots would need a slow tank to prevent them from over extending.

Jump back to quoted post4 Nov 2015, 01:13 AMNuclear Arbitor

indeed, the VI is a much better tank then the centaur, which is why it costs roughly twice as much.

for an AA/AI platform, the centaur is actually quite tough. it has medium tank hp, the best armour of the group, and very good damage. its durability is worse then a med tank overall but it also costs less then a med tank and has much worse AT capabilities.

the tank that i find the hardest to over extend, from being on both ends, is the V because it's tough, very fast (particularly with blitz), and can get doctrinal smoke. by comparison the VI B, which is exceedingly tough, i often see players over extend. i find that speed (pathing factors into this) is one of the biggest factors in over extension.

with all that said, what do you think the speed on the centaur should be, roughly?

Jump back to quoted post4 Nov 2015, 02:40 AMiTzDusty

It's fine.

Making it faster would make it a mirror of the ost wind that performs better.

Jump back to quoted post4 Nov 2015, 02:48 AMFiresparks

the centaur should be better, it's more expensive than the ostwind.

yes, 40 mp matter. Either buff the centaur's speed or lower the cost of the centaur.